A middle-aged recent immigrant from India recently set into motion a series of events that eventually led to Mississippi finally retifying the Constitutional amendment banning slavery. The rousing finale of the movie Lincoln served as inspiration. It sounds like a joke, but it's true. And even though it's been nearly 150 years since that fateful day in the Capitol in 1864, Mississippi's becoming the final state to officially ratify the Thirteenth Amendment serves as the final punctuation mark on a dark chapter in American history.

The circumstances for Dr. Ranjan Batra almost inadvertently inserting herself into Mississippi state history are accidental at best. After seeing Lincoln in theaters last November, he went home and did a little bit of Internet research only to discover the Mississippi never got around to actually ratifying the amendement. The state did vote to ratify the amendment back in 1995, nearly 20 years after Kentucky, the second-to-last state to ratify the amendment, held its vote. However, through an apparent clerical error, Mississippi never officially notified the United States Archivist of the ratification, meaning that they've officially been on the side of slavery for a century-and-a-half. (That sounds kind of sensational when you put it like that, but heck, you'd think the state would double check on an issue as big as this.) Batra and his friend Ken Sullivan reported the mistake up the chain of command, and this month, Mississippi finally sent in the paperwork to complete its belated ratification of the Thirteen Amendment.

In a funny way, Batra's adventure fact-checking his state history is the opposite of what Connecticut congressman Joe Courtney's fact-checking the movie. Courtney recently noticed that the movie showed a pair of Connecticut congressmen voting against the amendment, an unthinkable thing for a staunchly abolitionist state like Connecticut. Now, the congressman is wrestling with Steven Spielberg and the studio in an attempt to get the film fixed so that it doesn't cast his state in poor light. But when it's your state that's already cast itself in poor light, like in Mississippi's case, things get serious. Sullivan even got a certificate for setting this one straight.

When all was said and done, Mississippi state officials were pretty humble about their government's little blunder. Said Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann, whose office filed the final papers this year, "It was long overdue."

2. A correction to the article - 'that fateful day in the Capitol in 1864' was actually in 1865...

A Republican victory in the 1864 presidential election would guarantee the success of the amendment. The Republican platform called for the "utter and complete destruction" of slavery, while the Democrats favored restoration of states' rights, which would include at least the possibility for the states to maintain slavery. Lincoln's overwhelming victory set in motion the events leading to ratification of the amendment. The House passed the measure in January 1865 and it was sent to the states for ratification. When Georgia ratified it on December 6, 1865, the institution of slavery officially ceased to exist in the United States.

4. onehandle

onehandle

Sometimes it takes time to get things around... But 150 year, is a long time...

But then again - Sweden and Norway was formally at "war footing" for most of the 20th century too - as it was never made a "peace treaty" between the two country's after Norway broke away from the Union between the two states in 1905... It was not until 1993 the system kind of discovered the little fact, that Norway and Sweden had been on war footing for almost a century - and a finally peace treaty was signed in 1993.... Not that that little fact, had making traveling between Sweden and Norway any more difficult, as we have been friends, over the borders for years and years - and I suspect a war between Sweden and Norway to be near impossible today - as it was back in 1993...

8. Siam declared war against the US in 1942, it was an ally of Japan

Now, The Ambassador to the US, showed the Declaration to the US Secretary of State, but never actually gave it to the Secretary. The Ambassador to to the US returned to Siam and started to work for the Allies, while Siam was still technically at war with them. The US treated Thailand as a long time ally when Japan surrendered in 1945 (unlike Britain, Russia and France, which all demanded Thailand be treated as a Japanese Ally, Russia was to far away, and Britain and France were to weak to seriously oppose anything the US supported, the US position prevailed).

Siam changed its name to Thailand in 1949 (This was the second change Siam had adopted Thailand in 1939, but reverted to Siam in 1945, then back to Thailand in 1949).

9. happyslug

happyslug

Interesting - I had not clue about that at all..

But then again - in the wake of WW2, I suspect the only nation, who could do the shake and bake - was the US - and if they deiced Thailand to be a ally, the others, who might have options about it, just had to say ok... And the geographical boundaries - away from UK, away from USSR and france colonies, helped Thailand a lot also I guess..

But then again - it might as well being Thailand's method, for making noise to the US, when it came to alliance, as it was to make a formal war declaration to the US... I think a lot of things happened between the lines - and in the back door rooms many places under the cold war - and Thailand was maybe just another chess game for the power players of the world... ?